States GST & VAT - QUESTION : The Appellant is engaged in the supply of electric three-wheeler passengers and goods transport vehicles (e-rickshaws). To optimize logistics and facilitate sales through authorized dealers/ assemblers, the applicant intends to supply these vehicles in a Completely Knocked Down (CKD) condition. Appellant sought advance ruling on the following questions: 1. Whether the supply of a complete set of components of an electric three-wheeler vehicle (e-rickshaw) in a Completely Knocked Down (CKD) form, necessary and sufficient for the assembly of the finished vehicle, should be classified as the finished vehicle itself and what is the applicable rate of GST? 2. Whether the supply of a complete set of components of an electric three-wheeler vehicle (e-rickshaw) in a Completely Knocked Down (CKD) form, necessary and sufficient for the assembly of the finished vehicle, should be classified as a set of parts and what is the applicable rate of GST? RULING : 1. If a complete set of components of an electric three-wheeler vehicle (e-rickshaw) in a Completely Knocked Down (CKD) form includes motor and any three of the other four major components (other than motor) viz. transmissions, axles, chassis and controller in proportionate number for the assembly of the finished vehicle. In that case, GST is applicable @ 2.5% CGST + 2.5% SGST vide HSN code 87038040 and serial no. 441 of Schedule I of Notification No. 11/2017 – Central Tax (Rate) dated 28-6-2017 as amended by Central Notification No. 09/2025-Central Tax (Rate) dated 17-9-2025. 2. If the supply does not include either motor or any two of the other four major components (other than motor) viz. transmissions, axles, chassis and controller in proportionate number for the assembly of the finished vehicle. In that case, the supply will be regarded as that of components of e-rickshaw and is taxed @ 9% CGST + 9% SGST under different serial numbers as enumerated in Paragraph 4.4. M/s. Navya Electric Vehicle Private Limited, In re (2026) 128 ITPJ (SG) 340 (AAR) States GST & VAT - QUESTION : The Appellant is engaged in B2B trading of goods. The applicant proposed to implement a new model of business (“Proposed Model”) wherein it would, inter alia, be providing transportation services of goods exclusively by road to the customers purchasing such goods from various E-Commerce Operator (“ECO”) portals. It sought an advance ruling in respect of following questions: (a) Whether the services provided by the Appellant to customers would qualify as “Goods Transport Agency” (GTA) services? (b) Whether the services provided by the Applicant to unregistered customers through the electronic commerce operator’s portal would be eligible for exemption in terms of Sl. No. 21A of Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28-6-2017 (as amended)? RULING : (a) Services provided by the Applicant to customers would qualify as “Goods Transport Agency” (GTA) services. (b) Services provided by the Appellant to unregistered customers through the electronic commerce operator’s portal would be eligible for exemption in terms of Sl No. 21A of Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28-6-2017 (as amended). Flipkart India (P.) Ltd., In re (2026) 128 ITPJ (SG) 339 (AAR) States GST & VAT - QUESTION : The Appellant is engaged in the manufacture of injection moulding machinery and accessories. Since they are expanding their business operation, they have constructed a new factory adjacent to their existing factory, whereby they have incurred capital expenditure towards procurements in relation to setting up of this factory. It approached the Authority for Advance Ruling (AAR) with the following queries, viz., (1) Whether Input Tax Credit (ITC) is eligible on fire-fighting system and public health equipment for expansion of factory for manufacturing activity? (2) What should be the basis to arrive the timeline to avail ITC on tax invoice raised by Supplier to bill “Advance Component” of the Contract?. The AAR vide Ruling No. 31/ARA/2025 dated 18-8-2025, passed the following ruling for the question raised by the Appellant:- 1. The taxes under GST paid on the fire-fighting system and public health equipment carried out for expansion of factory for manufacturing activity is not eligible for availment of Input Tax Credit (ITC) by the Appellant, as it is blocked under sections 17(5)(c) and 17(5)(d) of the CGST/TNGST Acts, 2017. 2. The question of answering the second query on the timeline to avail ITC on the ‘Advance component’ involved in the instant contract, does not arise, as the main query on availment of ITC on the said contract is answered in negative Aggrieved by the said order, the Appellant filed an appeal to the Appellate Authority for Advance Ruling (AAAR). RULING : Once it is held that the ITC related to fire-fighting systems and public health equipment for the new factory is not available to the Appellant in the instant case, the question of answering the other query, viz., “What should be the basis to arrive the timeline to avail ITC on tax invoice raised by Supplier to bill “Advance Component” of the Contract.”, does not arise, as the same is directly related to the specific contract involved in the instant case, and is very much dependent on the main query, which has been answered in negative. Hence, the ruling pronounced by the AAR in Advance Ruling No. 31/ARA/2025 dated 18-8-2025 is upheld and accordingly, the appeal filed by the appellant is dismissed M/s. Shibaura Machine India Private Limited, In re (2026) 128 ITPJ (SG) 337 (AAR) States GST & VAT - QUESTION : The Appellant is engaged in the manufacture of injection moulding machinery and accessories. It entered into a Contract Agreement with supplier for execution of ‘Electrical LT works for New Factory Project’, to come up alongside the existing facility, wherein the ‘Scope of Work’ has been specified as “Supply, Installation, Testing and Commissioning of Electrical Works. It had applied for Advance Ruling, seeking a ruling on the following queries, viz., (1) Whether Input Tax Credit (ITC) is eligible on electrical works carried out for expansion of factory for manufacturing activity? (2) What should be the basis to arrive the timeline to avail ITC on tax invoice raised by Supplier to bill “Advance Component” of the Contract and Subsequent Adjustment of Advance in the Service Bills showing both Gross and Net amount. The AAR issued the following ruling for the question raised by the Appellant:- (1) The taxes under GST paid on the electrical installation work carried out for expansion of factory for manufacturing activity is not eligible for availment of Input Tax Credit (ITC) by the Appellant, as it is blocked under sections 17(5)(c) and 17(5)(d) of the CGST/TNGST Acts, 2017. (2) The question of answering the second query on the timeline to avail ITC on the ‘Advance component’ involved in the instant contact, does not arise, as the main query on availment of ITC on the said contract is answered in Aggrieved by the said order, the Appellant filed an appeal against the order of AAR to the AAAR. RULING : Once it is held that the ITC related to electrical installation for the new factory is not available to the Appellant in the instant case, the question of answering the other query, viz., “What should be the basis to arrive the timeline to avail ITC on tax invoice raised by Supplier to bill “Advance Component” of the Contract and Subsequent Adjustment of Advance in the Service Bills showing both Gross and Net amount.”, does not arise, as the same is directly related to the specific contract involved in the instant case, and is very much dependent on the main query, which has been answered in negative. The ruling pronounced by the AAR in Advance Ruling No. 32/ARA/2025 dated 18-8-2025 is upheld and accordingly, the appeal filed by the Appellant is dismissed. M/s. Shibaura Machine India Private Limited, In re (2026) 128 ITPJ (SG) 336 (AAR) States GST & VAT - QUESTION : The Appellant is engaged in rendering PMC services involving supervision, coordination and administrative management of projects, without undertaking any works contract or supplying any goods. Hence, the supply qualifies as pure services. It sought Advance ruling on the following questions: i) Whether GST is applicable on the centage charges collected being the centage charges levied for consulting services provided to a Government entity which is covered under article 243G/243W of the Indian constitution (12th schedule). ii) Whether the company can claim refund of GST already paid for the year 2017-18 onwards? RULING : i) GST is not applicable on the centage charges collected for pure PMC/consultancy services provided to Government/local authorities in relation to functions under article 243G/243W as these are exempt under Entry 3 of Notification No. 12/2017-CTR, subject to conditions. ii) The Appellant can claim refund of GST already paid for the past period, subject to the limitation of two years prescribed under the GST law. However, this authority cannot rule on the eligibility for refund against the claim since all facts related to the eligibility for refund are not available before this authority. M/s. Steel Industrials Kerala Limited, In re (2026) 128 ITPJ (SG) 335 (AAR) States GST & VAT - QUESTION : The Appellant is engaged in the business of buying and selling second hand motor vehicles, primarily old and used luxury cars. These vehicles are procured from both registered and unregistered persons. It sought clarification from Authority for Advance Ruling (AAR) on the following questions : i) Admissibility of Input Tax Credit (ITC) on Direct Expenditures for Second-Hand Vehicles: In view of the Notification No. 8/2018-Central Tax (Rate) dated 25th January 2018, whether the input tax credit would be available on inward supplies of goods or services which are in the nature of direct expenditures like spare purchases, repairs and refurbishment costs of vehicles, etc., except on purchase of old or used motor vehicles as mentioned in para 2 of the notification? ii) Admissibility of Input Tax Credit (ITC) on Other Common Business Expenses and Capital Goods: In view of the Notification No. 8/2018-Central Tax (Rate) dated 25th January 2018, whether the input tax credit would be available on inward supplies of other goods or services except on purchase of old or used motor vehicles as mentioned in para 2 of the notification. That is, whether credit of input tax available on inward supplies of goods or services like office/showroom rent, telephone, advertisement, professional charges, capital goods, etc., except that on inward supply of old or used motor vehicles. RULING : i) Input tax credit on inward supplies such as spare parts, repairs, and refurbishment services is admissible, as Notification No. 8/2018-Central Tax (Rate) restricts ITC only on the purchase of used motor vehicles themselves. Such credit shall, however, be subject to compliance with the conditions prescribed under sections 16 to 21 of the CGST Act and Rules 36 to 45 of the CGST Rules. ii) Input tax credit on inward supplies of goods or services such as office/showroom rent, advertisement, telephone, professional fees, and capital goods is admissible, as there is no restriction under Notification No. 8/2018-CT (Rate) or Rule 32(5) regarding such expenses. The availment shall be subject to fulfillment of the conditions under sections 16 to 21 of the CGST Act and Rules 36 to 45 of the CGST Rules. M/s. Goexotic Plus 91 Limited Motors Private Limited, In re (2026) 128 ITPJ (SG) 334 (AAR) States GST & VAT - QUESTION : The Appellant is engaged in rendering healthcare services rendered in connection with the treatment of psoriasis, dandruff, dermatitis, anti-fungal infections, folliculitis, and similar ailments. It sought advance ruling on the following question : Whether exemption is eligible on the healthcare services of treatment to psoriasis in skin and head, dandruff, dermatitis, anti-fungal treatment and folliculitis in accordance with Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax Rate dated 28-6-2017? RULING : The healthcare services provided by the Appellant in connection with the treatment of psoriasis, dandruff, dermatitis, anti-fungal infections, folliculitis, and similar dermatological conditions are exempted under Sl. No. 74 of Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28-6-2017. M/s. Advanced Hair Restoration India Private Limited, In re (2026) 128 ITPJ (SG) 333 (AAR) States GST & VAT - QUESTION : The Appellant is engaged in the manufacture of ‘Natural Fibre Composite Board’ (NFC) also commonly referred to as Rice Husk Boards, at their manufacturing facility. It sought Advance Ruling on the following questions, viz. “Whether the rice husk board manufactured by us comprising of natural fibre (rice husk powder), calcium carbonate, recycling waste & other processing aid as well as PVC resin, wherein PVC acts only as a bonding agent would remain classified as wood and articles of wood under chapter 44 & attract 12% rate of GST?” The AAR observed that the appellant failed to provide any details of purchase invoices of inputs, copies of sales invoices, brochure etc. On account of lack of adequate details, it was held that the Appellant’s application is non maintainable. Aggrieved by the said order, the Appellant filed an appeal against the order of AAR. RULING : The Appellants have now submitted the copies of purchase invoices of Raw Materials and sales invoices of Rice Husk Board and Rice Husk Profile. Further, during the course of hearing, it was stated that they are now in a position to provide the details/documents, which they did not submit before the advance ruling authority. The material produced for the first time needs to be verified for its factual accuracy and relevance to the issue in question. Hence, the case is remanded back to AAR to examine the issue afresh in the light of the materials and records now available. M/s. Vegan Wood Private Limited, In re (2026) 128 ITPJ (SG) 332 (AAR) States GST & VAT - QUESTION : The Appellant is a prestigious educational institution in India established in 1961. The Indian Institute of Management Act, 2017 declared certain Institutes of Management, including the Applicant to be ‘institutions of national importance’ with a view to empower these institutions to attain standards of global excellence in management, management research and allied areas of knowledge. It approached Authority for Advance Ruling (AAR) for ruling on the following questions: 1. Whether the Appellant established under the Indian Institutes of Management Act, 2017 (an Act of Parliament), is a ‘specified person’ under section 51 of the CGST Act read with Notification No. 50/2018-Central Tax dated 13-9-2018? 2. Whether the threshold of Rs. 2,50,000 for deduction of tax at source is to be determined on the value of supply under each contract (excluding GST), regardless of the number of invoices issued? RULING : 1. The Appellant is a ‘specified person’ under section 51 of the CGST Act read with Notification No. 50/2018-Central Tax dated 13-9-2018. 2. In case of a single contract, the threshold value of Rupees 2.5 lakhs applies to the total value of supply under the contract, excluding the GST payable. In case of separate contracts with the same supplier, each contract would be considered individually for the purpose of applying the threshold value of Rupees 2.5 lakhs. However, if the supply is made on a continuous basis or a recurrent basis, but is part of the original contract, the threshold value would be applicable on the contract and not the individual supplies. It is the contract which determines the threshold value of Rupees 2.5 lakhs and not the invoices. M/s. Indian Institute of Management, Ahmedabad, In re (2026) 128 ITPJ (SG) 331 (AAR) States GST & VAT - QUESTION : The Appellant is a registered Charitable Trust duly recognized by way of Registration under section 12AB of Income-tax Act, 1961. It was engaged in Charitable Activities, including preservation of environment by way of Plantation of Trees and Maintenance of trees. It submitted that their main object as contained in Trust Deed, contains “Tree Plantation and Maintenance” and therefore, it sought a ruling on the following questions: 1. Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the entry no. 1 of Notification No. 12/2017 (as amended from time to time) applies to the charitable activity of plantation and maintenance of tree (more particularly described in the Statement of Relevant Facts), by the applicant being a Charitable Institution, duly recognized under section 12AA of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for Preservation of Environment? 2. Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Appellant being a Charitable Institution, duly recognized under section 12AA of the Income-tax Act, 1961, is liable to pay tax on charitable activity of plantation and maintenance of tree? If yes, then to what extent and at what rate? RULING : 1. Sl. no. 1 of Notification No. 12/2017 dtd. 28-6-2017, as amended, will apply to the charitable activity of plantation and maintenance of tree by the appellant, being a Charitable Institution, duly recognized under section 12AB of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the preservation of environment. 2. The Appellant would be eligible for exemption from payment of GST under Sl. no. 1 of Notification No. 12/2017 dtd. 28-6-2017, as amended. M/s. Manav Seva Charitable Trust, In re (2026) 128 ITPJ (SG) 326 (AAR)